[Helianthus16]

>"Why don't Japanese loot? Because it's not in their culture. How is that culture defined? An absence of looting."

immediately followed by:

>A better explanation may be structural factors: a robust system of laws that reinforce honesty, a strong police presence, and, ironically, active crime organizations.

how is that in any way different from the circular definition the writer just criticized?

which I think indicates the real problem with the 'culture' argument; it's not that it's circular, it's that it is vague, which is why the rest of the (detailed) article is actually quite informative.

[jerf]

One is circular, one proposes a social mechanism whereby looting will lead to negative consequences for the looter. I'm having a hard time seeing what you think is not different about those two things.

[Helianthus16]

Those social mechanisms are a part of culture. I find it hard to conceive a definition of culture that does not include the systems of negative consequences that a society enforces.